Far-right parties heading for merger, National Union leader says

Bezalel Smotrich says Jewish Home, Otzma Yehudit, Yachad and his own party can’t afford to be divided; accuses Bennett of leaving religious Zionist camp

By Stuart Winer, TOI 

Head of the National Union party MK Bezalel Smotrich, speaks during an event of the Movement for the Quality of Government, in Modi'in, February 4, 2019. (Hadas Parush/Flash90)
Head of the National Union party MK Bezalel Smotrich, speaks during an event of the Movement for the Quality of Government, in Modi’in, February 4, 2019. (Hadas Parush/Flash90)

National Union party head Bezalel Smotrich on Tuesday said that four religious right-wing parties are close to agreeing on a united slate for the upcoming elections.

His comments flew in the face of remarks from National Union and Jewish Home officials who over the weekend said unity talks between their parties had stalled.

“The news is that we will go together,” Smotrich declared at the annual Besheva right-wing media group conference in Jerusalem. “The news is that we are making every effort.”

He said a four-way agreement would be achieved between his faction and its erstwhile partner the Jewish Home; Otzma Yehudit, headed by far-right figures associated with the banned Kach movement; and Yachad, headed by one-time Shas leader Eli Yishai.

The deal would be sealed in the coming hours or days, he said.


Head of the Jewish Home party Rabbi Rafi Peretz arrives to the party’s preliminary elections in Ramat Gan on February 4, 2019. (Flash90)

The move to join forces would bolster the factions’ chances of entering the Knesset. Apart, none of them were projected to cross the 3.25% electoral threshold.

“We don’t have the privilege to be adventurous and lose a single vote,” he said. “It’s time to make concessions so that we can can unite and run together.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had been pushing the factions to unite in order to have another potential coalition partner on the right should he be tasked with forming a government after the April 9 vote.

“You must not lose these votes, because at the end of this there is either a left-wing wing government or a right-wing government,” Netanyahu told a gathering of religious journalists Monday. “The split on the right will inevitably lead to a loss in the elections.”

Yachad chairman Eli Yishai and extreme Right politician Baruch Marzel, seen during a discussion in the Central Elections Committee in the next Knesset, on February 12, 2015. (photo credit: Hadas Parush/FLASH90)

It’s not yet clear what form a united faction would take.

Jewish Home and National Union have run together in the past, but the Jewish Home was seen as the senior partner, receiving the position of party chairman, more spots on the Knesset list and more ministerial posts in the government. Smotrich had reportedly sought to renegotiate that arrangement.

Hebrew media reports Tuesday said Jewish Home leader Rafi Peretz met with Yachad leader Eli Yishai the day before in Jerusalem.

A Jewish Home source said the meeting was aimed at “seeing if there is a connection to the public that Eli Yishai represents,” reported the Srugim website which caters to the religious Zionist community.

There was “a mutual examination of the electoral efficiency of uniting and the general atmosphere for possibility of running together,” the source added.

According to the report Yishai is willing to give up on the top slots of a combined slate in favor of Jewish Home and National Union members for the sake of forming a union. Yishai, who previously held several ministerial positions when he was a senior member of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, left that party in 2014 amid a rift with chairman Interior Minister Aryeh Deri. He established the Yachad party, which ran in parliamentary elections the next year but failed to clear the threshold.

The source noted that there are separate Jewish Home negotiations with Otzma Yehudit.

At the conference Smotrich also blasted New Right party leader Naftali Bennett who had earlier Tuesday addressed the conference, positioning himself as head of the religious Zionist campaign.

Education Minister and leader of the New Right party Naftali Bennett speaks at the 16th annual Jerusalem Conference of the ‘Besheva’ group, on February 12, 2019. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

In December, Bennett, who is education minister, left the flagship religious Zionist party, Jewish Home, taking with him the party’s number two, Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked. Together they jointly founded the New Right party.

“Bennett, you left religious Zionism,” Smotrich charged.

“Bennett is in crisis, that’s the truth,” he added. “He set off on his way and thought… that all the secular right wing will fall into his arms. He thought we were a millstone around his neck.”

Raoul Wootliff and Jacob Magid contributed to this report.

February 13, 2019 | 18 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

18 Comments / 18 Comments

  1. @ adamdalgliesh: Concur with the following you stated:

    Israelis must rely on themselves alone for salvation. No foreign state, not even the U.S., will bail us out.

    Even if a leader in Jordan were to come about who would agree to take allow Pal-Arabs to move to Jordan, Israel still needs to defeat all the terrorists and supporters west of the River Jordan (border between Israel & Jordan in Samaria per the treaty).

    The Trump Plan when it will be unveiled will not solve the conflict as the Pal-Arab’s goal is to destroy Israel not make peace with it. So Israel will either solve the problem with victory or continue in some version of the status-quo.

    Hopefully the right wing forms a coalition so no more withdrawals take place that harm Israel and lessens its security.

  2. @ Ted Belman: In my opinion, and of course it is only that, the idea of Jordanian Option is non-existent, because everyone in Jordan has been brainwashed to hate Israel. Mudar Zahran and a few others who disagree with this Jordanian consensus won’t change this.
    A coup is possible in Jordan as it is in most countries throughout the world. But when military leaders stage a coup, they always seize power for themselves, not on behalf of a liberal-democratic politician.

    I found no evidence that the U.S. is planning regime is planning regime change in Jordan either from USG sites or the sites of organizations like the CFR, which closely monitor USG policies and have connections to the USG. Nothing about desiring to replace Abdullah in Jordan.

    Secretary Pompeo’s failure to praise Abdullah beyond the minimum required by politeness does suggest a lack of real enthusiasm for him. On the other hand, the very fact that Pompeo recently visited Jordan and held a press conference with Abdullah and his ministers, and his public appeal to them to provide more help for the pro-U.S. forces in Syria, does indicate that the U.S. still recognizes Abdullah as the man in charge in Jordan and is still willing to work with him.

    There were no reports that Tillerson met with opposition leaders during his trip to Jordan.

    There have been no reports of meetings between Mudar Zahran and his associates and U.S. government officials on any of the U.S. government sites, or on any of the sites by the NGOs (CFR, Brookings Institute, Cargenegis Institiute, Washington Institute, Aspen Institute, etc.) that have close connections to the USG. IN the past, as I know from monitoring U.S. foreign policy closely for nearly fifty years, the USG always sends out public signals if it favors a foreign opposition politician or politicians, and wants them to replace the existing government of a country. Both Obama and Bush 43 did this, and Trump is now doing the same thing with regard to Venezuela, where he has made it clear that he wants Maduro replaced by the rivial claimant to the Presidency (can’t remember his name offhand).

    In the absence of any evidence, Ted’s claims that Mudar Zahran is only days away from seizing power in Jordan, which he has been making every few weeks now for more than two years, lack credibility, at least to me.

    I believe that there is no Jordanian option. Israelis must rely on themselves alone for salvation. No foreign state, not even the U.S., will bail us out. The meaning in Gaelic of the Irish (terrorist) organizations name “Sinn Fein,” “Ourselves Alone,” should be Israel’s motto too.

  3. @ david singer:
    david singer Said:

    I want whoever is in power in Jordan to cut a deal with Israel

    Like I said, I do not believe that any deal is possible with King Abdullah that would be acceptable to Israel. But Mudar has agreed that the Jordan River would be the border as it is now, that he will give full citizenship to all Palestinians and invite them all to emigrate to Jordan.

    That is such a good deal for Israel that the risks are worth it. There is no way the King would offer anywhere near the same.

    If it is going to happen, it will happen before the Israeli elections.

    I have no connection to the heads of these small parties. I don’t know them and they don’t know me. I am confidant that they will do their utmost to attach to another party.

  4. @ Ted Belman:
    Ted

    Your comments seem to indicate you believe you have the capacity to influence people but might not necessarily succeed on each occasion.

    Use these persuasive talents to get the leaders of small right wing parties to unite and make sure the votes they each receive do count.

    They may have to compromise on their policies. Better they understand the need to do so now – not when they are in the political wilderness because they each failed to make the threshold.

    Might I correct one statement you made involving myself:

    David Singer and I have a fundamental difference. He wants Israel to cut a deal with the King. For him, that’s the Jordan Option. I say the only way we will get a favourable deal with Jordan is by replacing the King with MUdar. Events have shown me to be correct.

    I want whoever is in power in Jordan to cut a deal with Israel. I have never believed a coup by Mudar can ever succeed. Calling for a coup by anyone is a recipe for destabilization of Jordan and a humanitarian disaster for its citizens. Jordan has been ruled by the Hashemites since 1923. That is a pretty good track record given what has happened around the Arab world. A violent change of regime is in nobody’s interest.

    The Hashemites have already concluded a favourable deal with Israel – the 1994 Peace Treaty. They now need to be persuaded to go further – to accept what the late Moshe Arens said on 11 January 1989:

    “Jordan is a Palestinian state. And it is with Jordan that we must decide where the border will run…. Should the border follow the Jordan River, as it does today, or should it be west of the Jordan, as the Jordanians would like?”

    Mudar and you might find it worthwhile pushing for this to occur now rather than keep calling for a coup that would empower Mudar to negotiate with Israel on Arens’ proposal..

  5. @ Bear Klein:
    The #2,3s,4s go where their leaders agree they should go. They will only go to the bottom of the river if they don’t amalgamate.

    I would be very surprised if most embassies in Israel did not read Israpundit on a daily basis to help them understand what is happening in the Jewish State.

  6. My readers are mostly American. Also many people in the intelligence community and other important institutions follow Israepundit. They consider it indespensible to their education. They often tell me that they really like my selection of articles. I am honoured that so many of the great writers that I post, also participate in the comments. That includes, David Singer, Martin Sherman, Linda Goudsmit, Janet Levy, Tabitha Koral, Lt Col Howard and Mordechai Nisan. I am sure there are others. Many people also mention how they enjoy reading the comments. So your comments are appreciated.

    As for my promoting Mudar Zahran, it has cost me considerably because of the campaign to destroy the conference and Mudar and the defamation suit against me. But in the end, I will win.

    I have counterclaimed in the law suit against Khaled Abu Toameh and Varda Epstein and Bat Zion Susskind for defamation and for conspiracy to damage me economically.

    Just as Martin Sherman has done a lot to popularize compensated emigration (it seems that more and more people are coming around to his view.) He has also popularized the idea that two nations cannot live in peace on such a small piece of land.

    My contribution to this debate is to unabashedly call for a coup in Jordan. Before I started promoting the idea about 2 years ago no one was thinking about it. The response I got to the idea was that Israel would never go for it because the king has kept the border quiet for 30 years etc. Also that the King was liked in government circles in the US and the US would never go for it.

    But now after, me highlighting why the King must go over the last two years, most informed people see the king as an enemy rather than a friend. I have made the coup very much more palitiable.

    David Singer and I have a fundamental difference. He wants Israel to cut a deal with the King. For him, that’s the Jordan Option. I say the only way we will get a favourable deal with Jordan is by replacing the King with MUdar. Events have shown me to be correct.

    There is much opposition to regime change emmanating from globalists. This includes, Iran, the EU, Qatar, and Turkey. We thought we had Saudi Arabia on board even after the Khashoggi murder. But now that the King of SA has taken back this portfolio from MBS, SA is also fighting us.

    But we will prevail.

    I reasoned from the start that I didn’t need the consent of Israelis or Americans or the KNesset or Congress. I just needed Trump to come on board. So all efforts have been focused on Trump, Kushner and Greenblatt.

    To this day, I was taken aback when so many Israeli right wing advocates were strongly against regime change and vigorously fought me all the way. They include Glick, Blum, Gatestone, Diker, Rhode, Susskind and Epstein were the more active. Some of them say that they were only defending Khaled or just against Mudar being the replacement, but none of them came out and said the coup was a good idea. I say without the coup, the Jordan Option is a non starter.

  7. @ david singer:
    I like Ted and having the site and going to conferences has made him visible. If the connection with Mudar Zaharan is positive or negative for Ted, well the jury still has not provided its final verdict yet on that. Noise over heard in the jury room is not greatly positive.

    The politicians will read the public and internal polls plus see who they could get work together. The trouble is not just the #1s in the parties but the #2s, 3s, 4s who get pushed back in the list if parties unite.

    Clearly most right wing voters will want several of these to parties to unite as it will help the right form a coalition and not waste votes!

    I was not implying Ted should impart or not impart his view to the right wing parties.

    My guess is Israpundit gets read more by Jews and other parties interested in Israel who live outside of Israel. It is the same for most on-line published English written blogs or news sites.

  8. @ Bear Klein:
    Ted no doubt can fill us in on the number of hits he receives on Israpundit. He is not devoting his life to this site for nothing.

    He is heavily involved with Mudar Zahran in trying to change the regime in Jordan (with which I personally do not agree) and must have contact with every politician in Israel.

    Ted could well be the person to knock some sense into four leaders (or perhaps even more) to get their act together and let votes count.

    Ted does not have to convince “most Israelis” – just four of them with huge ego’s as you have so beautifully described.

    Give it a go Ted. If you fail – you fail – but at least you can say you tried.

  9. @ david singer:
    Most Israelis even if they have a PHD and read English perfectly do not bother with Israeli English Press or Blogs much at all. Those who do are native English Speakers (called “Anglos”) no matter what their background is. The numbers are not huge unfortunately.

  10. @ Ted Belman:
    Feiglin obviously thinks you have clout and influence. Use it to try and get this four-way agreement off the ground.

    I think you are being too modest and self-effacing. A phone call here and there to the people working for the four leaders could have a great result.

    If they don’t join together they will all miss out and their votes will go into the garbage bin.

  11. @ Ted Belman:
    Regret you are apparently unwilling to give these four parties a shove to amalgamate by giving them one way to honourably overcome their four leaders egos as Bear Klein rightly identifies.

  12. @ david singer:
    It is so obvious that these parties need to amalgamate with each other or someone else that they don’t need any ones advice. In fact Marzel and Yishai both missed the threshold in prevous elections.

    I expect that they will save themselves.

  13. @ adamdalgliesh:
    You would think these various parties could join together on the following basis:
    1. Each leader will be part of a four man Council which will decide policy by majority vote.
    2. The Chairman will have a casting vote if there is a deadlock.
    3. The Chairmanship will rotate on a three months basis from the date of election.
    4. The first Chairman and successive Chairmen shall be decided by drawing their names out of a hat.
    5. The hat drawer could be a personality who agrees to perform the honour – say Ted Belman?

  14. My G-d, I hope that Smotrich’s optimistic prediction comes true. As Benjamin Franklin put it, “If we don’t hang together, we will all hang separately.” Smotrich should give up trying to “renovate” his party’s position with Jewish Home. We can’t afford this intrmural squabbling. The deadline for registering lists is only a few days away.